Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34960505›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Security Analysis of Machine Learning-Based PUF Enrollment Protocols: A Review.

Sameh Khalfaoui, Jean Leneutre, Arthur Villard, Ivan Gazeau, Jingxuan Ma, Pascal Urien

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sameh KhalfaouiEDF R&D, 7 Boulevard Gaspard Monge, 91120 Palaiseau, France.ORCID 0000-0002-9259-7785
Jean LeneutreLTCI, Télécom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, 19 Place Marguerite Perey, 91120 Palaiseau, France.
Arthur VillardEDF R&D, 7 Boulevard Gaspard Monge, 91120 Palaiseau, France.
Ivan GazeauEDF R&D, 7 Boulevard Gaspard Monge, 91120 Palaiseau, France.
Jingxuan MaEDF R&D, 7 Boulevard Gaspard Monge, 91120 Palaiseau, France.
Pascal UrienLTCI, Télécom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, 19 Place Marguerite Perey, 91120 Palaiseau, France.

Funding

Association Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie 2018/1810
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The demand for Internet of Things services is increasing exponentially, and consequently a large number of devices are being deployed. To efficiently authenticate these objects, the use of physical unclonable functions (PUFs) has been introduced as a promising solution for the resource-constrained nature of these devices. The use of machine learning PUF models has been recently proposed to authenticate the IoT objects while reducing the storage space requirement for each device. Nonetheless, the use of a mathematically clonable PUFs requires careful design of the enrollment process. Furthermore, the secrecy of the machine learning models used for PUFs and the scenario of leakage of sensitive information to an adversary due to an insider threat within the organization have not been discussed. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art model-based PUF enrollment protocols. We identity two architectures of enrollment protocols based on the participating entities and the building blocks that are relevant to the security of the authentication procedure. In addition, we discuss their respective weaknesses with respect to insider and outsider threats. Our work serves as a comprehensive overview of the ML PUF-based methods and provides design guidelines for future enrollment protocol designers.

Indexed as

Internet of ThingsComputer SecurityConfidentialityMachine LearningauthenticationInternet of Thingsmachine learningphysical unclonable function

Identifiers

PMID34960505
PMCPMC8705400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.